Travis In Austin
-
Posts
12522 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
17
Content Type
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by Travis In Austin
-
-
Sorry it took awhile to respond.
Thank you soooooiiiii much.
I was hoping you would be on.
Travis
-
I'm flying down to Corpus Christi, TX today for a funeral and thought I would check out a vinyl store while I was there if they had a good one.
Anybody know of any?
Travis
-
Not a documentary, but I saw an awesome movie tonight about Brian Wilson I can't reccomend highly enough. Stars Paul Dano and John Cusack who play the young and older Brian Wilson, respectively.
-
You could start and end with the Funk Brothers. I was born in '61, and grew up on Motown. These guys WERE Motown, and never got the credit in America.
Growing up in the midwest, everyone wanted to be Motown. Even the dorky white boys with two left feet had dreams of throwing down a slick choreographed dance step like the slick chills in all the Motown acts.
JWC would totally agree with you on that.
He has sent me some awesome funk mixes.
Travis
-
Looks like the wraps are about to come off the B2 bomber replacement. Expected to look a lot like the B2, but be stealthier, cheaper, and be remote piloted when desired.
Probably been flying for a while if history is an indicator.
Skunkworks is a fascinating place.
Dave
There was a budget request by the Air Force last spring FY 2015 for something just short of a billion for development, it is on C-Span. Jane's reported that with a $550M per plane cap it is likely to be a two engine design about half the size of a B-2. The price cap is expected to require the Air Force to use "mature technologies" rather then using new developments. The only two bidders, unless there is a secret one out there, are Northrup and Lockheed/Boeing.
Personally, I think it will get axed. There is going to be too much pressure for money from competing programs like the F-35II and the replacement for the Ohio class submarine.
But who knows.
The only two bidders were Nort
-
My wife would be all over the financial analyst if they were in Texas, or Nebraska, not Cali though.
They have over 14,000 employees in Fort Worth, TX, including a Skunk Works (ADP) office.
-
First it was the railroads (1800's). Then Standard Oil, US Steel. Remember the phone company monopoly, AT&T? Move on to IBM, Exxon, now Microsoft.
Google will have their turn.
That is all very true, but it was different legal or policy vehicles that effected change. Standard Oil and US Steel by the Sherman Act and TaftTaft-Hartley, AT&T by consumers in court under the Sherman Act, IBM I believe prevailed in court against Memerox and DOJ but entered into consent decrees, and Google can do what it does because of the Patriot Act.
Now it seems that it a more consumer driven backlash. Facebook has gotten heat, and you would think by now that people after reading about the last several murder cases would know that everthing is on your computer, not just google. The web searches found are always the big headline, poison, burying a body, etc. Of course you have the real smart ones that go to public library to be "anonymous" only to be caught on video tape conducting your searches.
I believe Mark mentioned in another thread that the internet, while providing quick useful information, is really just an advertising platform. People think because you use it at home or access it from your home it is private private.
It of course isn't, actually read a user agreement. You are the subject of the most sophisticated market research to date. What you search, how long on each page, what you click, don't click.
We have all see it, you search for Filson Clothing and then for the next month you will go to a page for something totally unrelated and there will be a banner ad for Filson.
I predict Google will have some sort of whistle blower that does them significant damage.
-
Primer, that should be one of Oldtimers faves
Foxy Brown
-
Billy Jack
The Return of Billy Jack
Night of the Living Dead (original)
Dazed and Confused, not surenif it qualfies, but it was low budget and no one was heard of at the time
-
Wow what a list so far. There were a couple mentioned I have not seen that I am going to check out right away.
No one mentioned Citizen Kane, it wouldn't be in my top two either.
I like movies that focus on the dialogue, or at least lately I have.
12 Angry Men is a great example, I like both the original and the remake.
Glengarry Glen Ross
Before Sunrise
Rope
The Conversation
The Breakfast Club
Resivoir Dogs
Dog Day Afternoon
Chinatown
and the many others mentioned like Network, Pulp Fiction, but if I coild only choose two films,
My Cousin Vinney, and
The Verdict
-
My wife won't watch sling blade because of the name
Just tell her that some folks call it a Kaiser blade, some folks call it a bananer blade, but you call it a sling blade.
-
1
-
-
Lot of good comments and remarks here about where to get your information. Just a couple of observations, after the "networks" were bought up by large corporations the news departments were converted from being "news organizations" to being a business with accountability for their bottom line, and thus they became entertainment. This has been well documented in academic journals and discussed by everyone from Reasoner to Cronkite.
We live in the information age now. We all first thought that this meant we would be more informed. What we all discovered is that there is more garbage then truth in the information, on any subject. Are tubes better than solid state, CDs better than LPs, Ford vs. GM, is a place to eat any good, food safety, product safety, teacher ratings, music ratings and anything else you can possibly think of, including hate. This subject doesn't have to be on a recent event in Congress, it could be on any issue that effects a person and/or their family. It take more work to be well informed in the information age. You have to work at it. It there is a blog article on a subject you have to find out about the blogger, if it is a website, about who is behind the website. To be well informed before the information age all you needed to do was read two or three newspapers with different points of view, a couple of national journals with opposing view points like The National Review and The New Republic, and watch the news on one network in the evening and another network at night. It took a couple of hours a day to be well informed, but it wasn't that difficult. You could save some time by subscribing to a news consolidator that summed up articles from around the country, like "This Week."
With the information age you are bombarded with email blasts telling you to worry about this, you get news in the form of sound bites of information with catchy phrases borrowed from advertising, tweets from whomever you deem is worth following about their views in 160 characters or less, viral videos, 24 hour news services. The objective now is to try and have you get all of your news from one source. TV, Tweets, Ipad, blogs, whatever, their hope is that you get it all from them, whoever "them" is. You will have information overload, but you will not be well informed. There are about 6 corporations in the US that control about 90% of the media. You have to be extremely skeptical about any "news" article or broadcast, regardless of the source. Skeptical, not, paranoid, there is a difference.
It is hard to be well informed in the information age because of the sorting and sifting you have to do. I think people tend to gravitate to publications and television programs that have similar views they do. It is human nature. The problem is that the view points get confused with the facts. The facts get spun, to match the viewpoint. This isn't news, it is advocacy. Everyone does it, some slightly, some very overtly. It is a fantasy that you are getting fair and balanced information from ANY one network or news source. The way they are organized and that humans run them makes it impossible.
Whatever the relative merits, bias, etc. of a particular network, there is no way you can get a balanced approach on ANY issue from a single source. I don't care if it is the weather, a movie review, what the local dog catcher is doing, or national news. If they allow the opposing view point to have equal time, equal stature, etc., they will turn off their base, whatever that is, and lose viewers. They cannot have "balance" because they will lose viewers, and you don't last on those network shows if you lose viewers.
AP is still the most often cited news organization and enjoys a reputation as still authoritative and trustworthy. I don't know if that is actually the case or not. Mark asked if the AP article was accurate, here is it is you want to read it and decide for yourself:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CONGRESS_HOMELAND?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Fortunately, on the issue of politics, you don't need to rely on ANY news account to get to the truth of the matter. If an issue is important to you and your really want to know what the situation is, what the arguments are, what political maneuvers are being utilized, what the actual testimony was, the House and the Senate DEBATES, the votes, etc. it is all there on C-Span. Uncut, full length, gavel to gavel coverage.
http://www.c-span.org/search/?tagid[]=485&sort=Newest
Unfortunately, now in order to be fully informed on a issue, whether it is stereo, home theater, turntables, politics, whatever, it usually requires finding trustworthy sources, whether they be forums such as this one, a blog, website, magazine, and to consult multiple sources when possible. In many cases it takes longer to find a trustworthy and authoritative source then it does the answer, but we have all been burned by misinformation and we know it is worth the effort.
-
1
-
-
I have tried to attach the photo of the back of the program for Joe's wife, however, whatever I do, it end up upside down. Maybe somebody here can do something with it and repost it right side up. In the meantime, I have just dictated it out as it appears in the photo so you don't have to turn you head upside down:
Obituary
Patricia Ann Shultz, of Kyle, Texas, was born October 2, 1959 in Vidor, TX. She passed away Saturday, February 21, 2015, at the age of 56.
Pat is survived by her husband, Joe Shultz, and children Aaron Shultz, Emily Shultz, and Jake Kesinger. Sister Sandy Jacobs & Brother Kenneth Jacobs.
She met her husband Joe in Hemphill Texas, and they married 28 years ago in Florida on the Gulf of Mexico. Employment took them from Florida back to Nacogdoches, then on to Phoenix Arizona, before returning to Austin in 1992.
Pat was a loving wife and homemaker who home schooled Aaron and Emily. Her family and friends will always remember her as a kind and caring mother.
The family of Mrs. Pat Schultz wishes to express out sincere thanks for the expressions of lover during our time of bereavement.
-
2
-
-
Luther and I were able to spend some time today with Joe and his wonderful family. I will attach soon a photo of the back of the program giving a brief background on his beloved wife when I get home..
The music Joe picked out was wonderful and it was amazing how they put together a photo essay of his wife and their family.
Travis
-
1
-
-
Duck or a Rabbit?
-
Gold and White from the beginning, and it has never changed.
-
I am confident that Earl is going to get that rig on track and I will bet a steak dinner at the Scotch 'N Sirloin in Binghamton
Safe bet...especially since the Scotch is no longer in Binghamton or Rochester. Only the original in Syracuse (where I took my prom date in 1970) is still operating.
WHAT? Really? That was one of my favorite places. I went to school with a kid from Binghamton and we went there when I visited, seems like they served us no problem at 18 or 19 (was New York 18 drinking age in the late 70s?). They had locations in LA and Santa Barbara a couple of years later we hung out at. LA closed a long time ago I heard. It seemed like it was a real Binghamton institution that you would never expect to go away, like Scoma's in San Francisco, Morton's in Chicago, etc., etc.
The last time I was in Binghamton, a long time ago, I was able to arrange a tour at the Mac factory and then went by there for the obligatory stop. Well I am glad there is one still left, I hope it is good as it used to be.
-
bump for me to reread.
Michael:
So where do things stand now?
-
The small studio I did record in during the early '70s made changes over the years. Originally, most everyone was in a huge room, although it was fairly dead. Maybe twenty foot ceiling, and room to spread everyone out. Later on the room didn't change so much, but the tried to isolate everyone more, the acoustic piano was totally encased in soundproofing, etc. All reverb was added through electronics, although they did have a huge room just for reverb. A speaker in one end and a mic or two in the other. The sound you got out of recording there was mostly what you were able to put into it. Dan Fogleberg did an album there, as did Styx, Heartsfield, and tons of others I don't remember.
Later, I think they went back to getting more of the sound from the room (again).
Bruce
Golden Voice/Jerry Milam? He and Azoff were quite a combination.
You recorded there? Do you have the tapes
Travis
-
Most of the industrialized world had the required focus in WWII. Circling wagons to prevent global catastrophe doesn't require a hive mind, just enlightened self interest on the part of the ruling class and business interests.
Main thing is you seem to be avoiding the question. Let's make it blunt: Will there be global catastrophe, and if not, why not?
Dave
The focus in WWII was production, ours, and destroying their's. Our most advanced fighter, the P-51 was designed before we entered the war and was powered by a British power plant we made under license. Our most advanced bomber, the B-29 was designed in the late '30s and prototypes were made before we entered the war. The focus, ingenuity and genius we had in WWII was getting our production to 100% very quickly and then expanding that capacity. We were 10 years behind the Germans in most things, and 20 years behind in some things like rocket technology. Did we develop things and improve on technology during the war, sure we did. The obvious example is the Manhattan Project, but it didn't "solve" anything. There were sacrifices and shortages at home because we were not prepared. We converted automobile plants to airplane factories. Neville Chamberlain lacked focus and the US sure lacked focus until December 7th. We were on the "brink."
Ozone depletion was an international problem, solved by a phased in ban on certain chemicals, based on science, with economic sanctions for violations and aid to underdeveloped countries to be able to comply. It is working.
The major distinction between environmental problems such as ozone and AGW is if you reach the brink while you study it and debate it until there is a catastrophe in on of your own harbors, it is too late.
As far as how to get to being carbon neutral by 2070, some are talking that it will be possible by 2050. As to how to do it, here is one article I found on a quick search ("how do we get to zero carbon emissions") that references research that I didn't have the time to read. However, what is clear is that the leading industrialized nations are working on getting to carbon neutrality in a very serious way. For the specifics on what the technology and energy policy will look like, the studies and the research are apparently there for the reading for those that want serious answers. We can either drag our feet, or we can be the leader in that technology and innovation to the benefit our economy.
http://phys.org/news/2014-09-australia-carbon-emissions-economy.html
Will there be a global catastrophe, and if not, why not? No, because science has revealed the problem, the way to fix it, and the world community, through science and technology, is figuring out ways to achieve the solution and be economically beneficial. There will not be a catastrophe because we are working on it now, just like the ozone 40 years ago. Plus, if predictions are true, we will have autonomous vehicles shortly that will be electric, solar powered, or a combination thereof. Tesla and Google will be the leading innovators, not the Big 3 (or is it 2 now) in Detroit. The Coal and Oil states will become like the Tobacco states, they will be heavily taxed and regulated, and they will adapt and find new business and industry in their states to replace the lost jobs and revenue. The coal and oil companies will pour more and more money into politics, eventually realize that is a lost cause, and go the way of Tobacco companies; still here but shifting to mostly exports and international sales, diversifying into other products like beer, and clinging on with every last breath as their sales in the US continue to decline. We will tax them, oil and coal, or the consumers of their products, in order to fund research and development of new technologies to replace oil and coal, AND, as a matter of public policy in order to make alternate energy sources more attractive and competitive. You will see hugh tax credits for electric vehicles, solar panels and wind generation. There will be a restructuring of the Atomic Energy Commission. After these changes in tax and public policy you will then see the focus we had in WWII, driven by price and demand.
Of course, some of this might be conjecture.
-
Off topic: Just saw that
Leonard Nimoy (Spock) passed away this morning.
Spock believed that Global Warming was man made.
-
WW II is the wrong analogy. We were slow to get in, it was "their" war until December 7th.
The analogy was the discovery of a hole in the ozone layer and the chemicals that caused it my American scientists which led to the phased in ban of freon in aerosol sprays and other refrigerants. The Montreal Protocol was the result that has been amended several times to include other chemicals. Chemicals that increase global warming. The MP is working on the ozone hole.
Koyoto is the international solution to global warming, it spells out what needs to be done and by when. We were in Koyoto, a part of the solution, then we withdrew, now we are back in it again.
Personally, AGW shouldn't be our main concern. There will be more flooding in New York, othet coastal cities, more severe weather patterns, etc. and we can adapt to that and argue about what can be done all we want.
The real problem, in my view, is that the pH of the ocean is 30% more acidic from carbon emissions, all man made. The number and the cause are undisputed. Aside from whatever nations that depend on the oceans we all depend on it for oxygen. If green algae begins to slow in reproduction due to pH increasing, or worse, begins dying, it is all over. The ocean, in addition to providing half of the oxygen we breath also removes half of the CO2 that is removed by photosynthesis.
What I worry about is that we are not putting enough focus on the ocean in science and research to determine just how much it can take beyond what we have done already. We learned that coal burning was able to pollute the ocean to the point of toxic levels of mercury in fish in only 100 years. Pregnant women are advised to avoid all fish/seafood in this country.
Climate and the weather get the attention because it plays out in storms, floods and heatwaves. A scientist sitting in a lab looking as near microscopic plants is pretty boring and diffict to understand how they are ESSENTIAL for life on the entire planet to exist.
-
2
-
-
Bumped for Earl to look at
-
1
-
-
See posts 1 and 7
I read posts 1 and 7, twice. In fact, I read all the posts, carefully. In your Post #3 you ask for Chad's thinking on why the change. Chad stated the reason for the change clearly and succinctly in Post #2, I understood it and it makes common sense to me.
That sub-forum hasn't changed, it just doesn't make the front page. Forumites, including me, who want some other-than-speaker talk can post there, exactly as before.
Can you explain why this is upsetting to some? No personal connections are being lost, nobody is taking down the sub-section or saying this is not important to posters here, its really just a minor change. I feel like I'm not understanding why some people are upset.
Since I don't have much opportunity to log on during the day and post, I probably use the “view new content” link up in the right corner more often to catch up or look at the "Recent Topics" section that is off to the side first to see if there are new topics of that day.
Other times I go straight to the sub-forums that I have set to push the first post of a new topic to my email. I see only one person subscribed to the general lounge forum for new topics while there are 22 people subscribed to the garage sale section.
I did as you and read the indicated posts, read a few additional posts and read several threads in the lounge section and found a lot of content that is interesting, some not so interesting, and a whole lot of back and forth by a few that seemed to only be trying to prove they were right or that seemed to try to discredit rather than adding thoughtfully to the topics, in addition to a few of the forum attorneys on questioning what should and shouldn’t be on the forum trying to figure out that line in the sand (are they trying to figure it out only to subsequently push it?).
I suspect that since the banner being questioned in this thread is titled "Recent Audio Posts," some of that banter (many bordering on bickering, amongst other things) may not be helping from a “Klipsch branding” perspective for a new person interested in Klipsch and being directed to the audio forums or even to the casual Klipsch-head that can only frequent the threads periodically.
I believe that I probably understand aspects of Chad’s point as actually, it was only through using the “view new content” link is the only way I happened upon a few nice reviews that Joe had done for his headphones and amps as the topic would have been pushed from the "recent audio posts" section rather quickly.
Maybe traffic in the lounge is sufficient to have its own side bar like “Recent Topic” since the formatting on my screen shows room in that column.....
Disclaimer: As used in this post, "attorneys," “banter,” “bickering,” "Klipsch-head," and other terms were not used or meant to be taken in any disparaging way by any forum member or by anyone reading these threads and lurking. As always, please note that the information presented by this author is meant for fun, sometimes thought-provoking, and is not intended as insult or otherwise!!!
Thank you for this post FJD. I was unaware that you could subscribe to a subforum.
I will be doing that today. Whether or not they choose to put either of those subforums back on the recent post list it won't really matter to me, I will subscribe to what I am interested in.
Travis
Beautiful weather Sunday project.
in Lounge
Posted
Fantastic job, that looks great.
I have a lot of fun memories down in Houma.
Travis